[UCLA 15]

The new Denon line doesn't intrigue me because $300 is my absolute max price, and they are all considerably more than that (aside from the fact that I also don't like the way any of them look). 
 
The PSBs, on the other hand, are highly interesting. The $400 is still too much for me, though. The new un-amped PSBs will be $300? If so, then my choice is definitely narrowed down to the M-100s or that.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Nevermind, What $399 suggested retail price for D400, I say good luck!
 
Hmm didn't know they had up the page for it already http://usa.denon.com/US/Product/Pages/ProductDetail.aspx?PCatId=Headphones(DenonNA)&CatId=UrbanRaver(DenonNA)&Pid=AHD400(DenonNA)
 
Now I'm even afraid of how much overpowered bass this one will output lol....

 

[roma101]

UCLA 15 your thoughts echo mine regarding the Denons to the tee.

As for the PSB, I'm only mildly interested in them. I think I would have been more interested if the NC was reportedly better and the SQ decrease doesn't appeal to me as well. In contrast, while the M-100 doesn't have NC, the sound sig may be more suitable for portable use than a non-NC PSB at least IMO. But I'll continue to be interested as impressions/comparisons start flowing in until I get to try them both myself.

 

[UCLA 15]

^And your thoughts on the PSBs echo mine. I figure this:
 
The non-NC PSBs and the M-100s come out. Let's say that, based on SQ alone, the PSBs are better. Truthfully, whichever one is better, I don't think the margin in SQ between the 2 will be that great. Therefore, even if the PSBs have the better SQ, I think I would still take the M-100s over the PSBs because of everything else that the M-100s offer like the fantastic build quality and looks, great accessories, exoskeleton case, and new to V-Moda features like the folding earcups and dual cable entry (not that the PSBs wouldn't have these things, I just like the overall package that the M-100s offer more).
 
I already like my M-80s a lot. If V-Moda has improved on the SQ of the M-80s with the M-100s at all, then I'm pretty much going to get M-100s.

 

[gelocks]

AnakChan posted some of his impressions of the PSB here:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/products/psb-m4u-2-noise-canceling-headphones/reviews/7183
 
I don't like the looks of the PSB that much and I pretty much know I will not be using the Noise Cancellation feature so PSB at least for me is out of the picture. I do still want to try the Denons and the V-MODAs. Thinking of pre-ordering from Crutchfield... (and buying the V-MODAs from amazon since I have a couple of points there left to use...)
 
For now... the Sig Pros are killing it... (just listening to Pendulum...)
BTW, I think the Mad Dogs will arrive this week (with the fixed bass response) so can't wait.
 
For the guys looking into these headphones (M100, PSB, etc.) maybe the Mad Dogs would be another option...

 

[roma101]

^And your thoughts on the PSBs echo mine. I figure this:

The non-NC PSBs and the M-100s come out. Let's say that, based on SQ alone, the PSBs are better. Truthfully, whichever one is better, I don't think the margin in SQ between the 2 will be that great. Therefore, even if the PSBs have the better SQ, I think I would still take the M-100s over the PSBs because of everything else that the M-100s offer like the fantastic build quality and looks, great accessories, exoskeleton case, and new to V-Moda features like the folding earcups and dual cable entry (not that the PSBs wouldn't have these things, I just like the overall package that the M-100s offer more).

I already like my M-80s a lot. If V-Moda has improved on the SQ of the M-80s with the M-100s at all, then I'm pretty much going to get M-100s.

X2 you hit the nail on the head for me, especially the last part about the M-80. All my anticipation for the M-100 is based off how impressive the M-80 is.

 

[Phifer]

Quote:

I took the Ultrasone Signature Pro out of the running- not because they aren't amazing, but because they aren't $900 more amazing than the PSB.  If Ultrasone wants to compete with some of the top notch circumaural portables coming out, they need to add smart/phone/Iphone cables and find some justification to lower the price so that they are competitive with the sound-to-cost ratio.

 
 
Ultrasone Signature Pros can be purchased for $850 new. Not exactly $900 more than the PSB.

 

[UCLA 15]

Quote:

 
 
Ultrasone Signature Pros can be purchased for $850 new. Not exactly $900 more than the PSB.

Am I crazy for still thinking that $850 headphones should not be compared to $400 headphones?

 

[roma101]

Eh, I think it's fair game. Just because it's more expensive doesn't mean it's better or that much better. I personally love to know how close a $300 hp can come to an $850 hp.

 

[Phifer]

Quote:

Am I crazy for still thinking that $850 headphones should not be compared to $400 headphones?

 
 
No I agree. I was merely posting to correct a price mistake that had been posted.
 
The difference between the $1,300 quoted and the $850 street price is very substantial and I felt it should be corrected.

 

[Craigster75]

Quote:

 
 
No I agree. I was merely posting to correct a price mistake that had been posted.
 
The difference between the $1,300 quoted and the $850 street price is very substantial and I felt it should be corrected.

I stand corrected, so please let me rephrase.  I don't think the Signature Pro is worth more than double the cost of the PSB M4U2.  If the M-100 comes close to the M4U2's SQ related to midrange detail and accurate high end along with the anticipated superior bass extension, I would absolutely acknowledge the M-100 as a better value than the M4U2 and concede that the M4U2 is more of a "travel" or "executive" headphone compared to the more portable and utilitarian M-100. 
 
I suppose what I am trying to say is that, as of today, IMHO, the M4U2 is the best sounding headphone in its price range that I have heard.  As soon as the M-100 comes out and/or Denon launches their new line, I am open to (and would welcome) a headphone that surpasses the SQ and overall value of the M4U2 which is why I have held off purchasing any new headphone.
 
On a side note, I am curious as to why one retailer is able to sell the Sig Pro for so much less than list compared to everyone else and the cynical side of me is wondering if there is a catch.

 

[A Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Am I crazy for still thinking that $850 headphones should not be compared to $400 headphones?

 
Yes.
They're both headphones, they both reproduce sound, and they're both on the market, so why not?
Besides, to classify them as incomparable is a comparison in itself.

 

[UCLA 15]

Quote:

Eh, I think it's fair game. Just because it's more expensive doesn't mean it's better or that much better. I personally love to know how close a $300 hp can come to an $850 hp.

This is the fair way to compare $300-400 headphones to $850 headphones. To see in what areas the cheaper headphones are arguably close to the more expensive ones.
 
What isn't fair is to do that comparison and then knock on the cheaper headphones for being worse (if they are worse). "I just bought some M-100s, and I'm really bummed that they aren't as good as my Sig Pros. I wouldn't recommend M-100s because of that." Well, no duh. They are less than half as expensive. My point is that cross-price range comparisons are fine if they are purely out of a discussion oriented motive, but that it isn't fair to say that the cheaper headphones are bad or anything just because the more expensive ones are better (like they should be).

 

[roma101]

Quote:

This is the fair way to compare $300-400 headphones to $850 headphones. To see in what areas the cheaper headphones are arguably close to the more expensive ones.
 
What isn't fair is to do that comparison and then knock on the cheaper headphones for being worse (if they are worse). "I just bought some M-100s, and I'm really bummed that they aren't as good as my Sig Pros. I wouldn't recommend M-100s because of that." Well, no duh. They are less than half as expensive. My point is that cross-price range comparisons are fine if they are purely out of a discussion oriented motive, but that it isn't fair to say that the cheaper headphones are bad or anything just because the more expensive ones are better (like they should be).

Agreed, people should always be aware of their price points while comparing. I'll always be interested in how closely a cheaper hp compares to a more expensive one, especially since I know there's no way I'll be able to be afford the more expensive one any time soon (Sig Pro in this case).

 

[Craigster75]

Quote:

This is the fair way to compare $300-400 headphones to $850 headphones. To see in what areas the cheaper headphones are arguably close to the more expensive ones.
 
What isn't fair is to do that comparison and then knock on the cheaper headphones for being worse (if they are worse). "I just bought some M-100s, and I'm really bummed that they aren't as good as my Sig Pros. I wouldn't recommend M-100s because of that." Well, no duh. They are less than half as expensive. My point is that cross-price range comparisons are fine if they are purely out of a discussion oriented motive, but that it isn't fair to say that the cheaper headphones are bad or anything just because the more expensive ones are better (like they should be).

In this case (M4U2 vs. Sig Pro), I think the comparison actually benefits the less expensive headphone as they hold their own sonically against a much higher priced competitor.  I believe there is even a quote from Val going back several weeks where he confidently compared the SQ of the M-100 to much more expensive headphones without mentioning specific models.  I agree that grading should be done on a price curve.